ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAAABACADAEAFAGAHAIAJAK
1
2
3
4
5
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FORM FOR MANCOM MEMBERS
6
7
Name of ManCom Member:
8
School/Unit:
9
Name of Evaluator:Period covered:2022-2023
10
Position of Evaluator:Date Completed:
11
12
Important Reminder: Please do not write over the red, black, and greyed out areas
13
Please assign weights to the following Performance Factors below
14
PERFORMANCE FACTORS (KRAs) FOR MANCOM MEMBERSWeight assigned
15
16
Part 1: Evaluation of overall contribution to collegial governance25%
17
Part 2: Accomplishment of their respective ManCom portfolio25%
18
Part 3: Accomplishment of unit goals assigned to the ManCom or discharged of their line function (if any)40%
19
Part 4: Evaluation of performance in other assigned functions/ duties10%
20
TOTAL WEIGHT (should be equivalent to 100%)100%
21
22
WHAT RATINGS TO GIVE AND WHAT EACH RATING MEANS
23
RATINGMEANINGDESCRIPTION
24
5OUTSTANDINGOverall performance exceeded the expectations to a very high degree, and way beyond the standards of quality and time set. Consistent positive feedback and commendations from authorities or stakeholders were noted as a result of excellent performance and delivery, which may and/or can be used as evidence.
25
4EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONSOverall performance exceeded the expectation, and above the standards of quality and time set. A few positive feedback and commendations from authorities or stakeholders were noted as a result of above average performance and delivery, which may and/or can be used as evidence.
26
3MEETS EXPECTATIONSThe goals were achieved as planned.
27
2NEEDS IMPROVEMENTSomething was done to achieve the goal, only the goal did not reach the standards of quality, quantity, or time set. A few negative feedback from authorities or stakeholders were noted as a result of performance and delivery, which may and/or can be used as evidence.
28
1SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERPERFORMEDNo affirmative action was done to achieve the goal OR something was done to achieve the goals, only they did not reach the standards of quality, quantity, or time set to a considerable degree. Consistent negative feedback from authorities or stakeholders were noted as a result of underperformance, which may and/or can be used as evidence.
29
30
Important Reminder: Please do not write over the red, black, and greyed out areas
31
PART 1: EVALUATION TO OVERALL CONTRIBUTION TO COLLEGIAL GOVERNANCE
Please give a candid and objective evaluation of the individual vis-à-vis:		WEIGHT ASSIGNED TO THIS FACTOR
(Please make sure weight has been set above):		25%
32
Sub-factorsEVIDENCES BY CITING SPECIFIC INSTANCES HOW THIS BEHAVIOR WAS MANIFESTED
(links to evidences shared with your evaluator may also be presented)		MANCOM MEMBER'S SELF-RATINGEVALUATOR'S RATING/ FINAL RATING
33
TIMELINESS/ACCURACY/ COMPLETENESS OF SUBMISSION/ DECISIONS

Works diligently on ManCom papers, avoids delays and gives priority to ManCom work
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION4
34
35
36
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
37
38
TIMELINESS/ACCURACY/ COMPLETENESS OF SUBMISSION/ DECISIONS

Follows the rules on collegiality in decision making
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION4
39
40
41
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
42
43
TIMELINESS/ACCURACY/ COMPLETENESS OF SUBMISSION/ DECISIONS

Maintains confidentiality
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
44
45
46
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
47
48
CONTENT/ SUBSTANCE OF PROPONENT PAPERS

Prepares dossiers for decisions and write proponent papers that are clear, well-prepared, and include past decisions/ precedents on the matter, relevant policies and critieria and supporting documents
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
49
50
51
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
52
53
TEAMWORK/ HARMONY WITH SUBORDINATES/ PEERS AND SUPERIORS

(Feedback from peers or people by individual may be solicited as needed)

MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
54
55
56
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
57
58
AVAILABILITY FOR MEETINGS AND CONSULTATIONS

Attends all ManCom meetings and is never absent without valid reason(s)

MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
59
60
61
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
62
63
AVAILABILITY FOR MEETINGS AND CONSULTATIONS

Habitually present and available for consultation

MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION4
64
65
66
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
67
68
AVAILABILITY FOR MEETINGS AND CONSULTATIONS

Effectively substitutes for designated ManCom members (according to substitution plan)

MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
69
70
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
71
72
73
RATING FOR PART 1 (OVERALL CONTRIBUTION TO COLLEGIAL GOVERNANCE): 4.00
74
75
PART 2: ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MANCOM PORTFOLIOWEIGHT ASSIGNED TO THIS FACTOR
(Please make sure weight has been set above):		25%
76
PORTFOLIO OF THE MANCOM MEMBERDESCRIBE BRIEFLY HOW THE MANCOM MEMBER WAS ABLE TO CARRY OUT HIS/HER PORTFOLIO
(Include links to evidences shared with evaluator, if any)		MANCOM MEMBER'S SELF-RATINGEVALUATOR'S RATING/ FINAL RATING
77
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION4
78
79
80
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
81
82
RATING FOR PART 2 (ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MANCOM PORTFOLIO): 4.00
83
84
PART 3: ACCOMPLISHMENT OF ASSIGNED UNIT GOALSWEIGHT ASSIGNED TO THIS FACTOR
(Please make sure weight has been set above):		40%
85
UNIT GOALS ASSIGNED TO THE MANCOM MEMBER
(e.g financial targets, deliverables, projects, etc.)
DESCRIBE AND EVALUATE THE EXTENT TO WHICH UNIT GOALS ASSIGNED TO THE MANCOM MEMBER WERE EXECUTED AND ATTAINED:
(Include links to evidences shared with evaluator, if any)		MANCOM MEMBER'S SELF-RATINGEVALUATOR'S RATING/ FINAL RATING
86
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION4
87
88
89
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
90
91
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
92
93
94
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
95
96
MANCOM MEMBER'S JUSTIFICATION
97
98
99
EVALUATOR'S REMARKS
100